[kgr]

Your tendency is to psych mostly early in a team match. This will make opps unsure for the rest of the match.
Should this be indicated on your convention card. (e.g: Psches: mostly early in the match):
- when you never discussed this with your regular partner (He has seen it, but maybe does not really realise that this is your strategy).
- when you told your partner that this is a good strategy and you will try to do it.
...Or can this be considered as general bridge knowledge and no disclosure is needed?
Thanks,
Koen

[the hog]

For heaven's sake, this is taking full disclosure to ad absurdum.

[Codo]

The_Hog, on Aug 23 2009, 07:52 PM, said:

For heaven's sake, this is taking full disclosure to ad absurdum.

Because...?

YOu remember the guy Art talked about: He psyched in the first board of every team match they played. His partner will be well aware of this. But me as on opponent won't be. This is unfair if it is not disclosed.

[jillybean]

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

Your tendency is to psych mostly early in a team match. This will make opps unsure for the rest of the match.
Should this be indicated on your convention card. (e.g: Psches: mostly early in the match):

- when you never discussed this with your regular partner (He has seen it, but maybe does not really realise that this is your strategy).

You can do this once or twice, then it becomes an implicit agreement, illegal.

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

- when you told your partner that this is a good strategy and you will try to do it. 

Illegal, this is a concealed partnership understanding

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

...Or can this be considered as general bridge knowledge and no disclosure is needed?

And this must be a joke? No

[TimG]

I think this is probably a case of general bridge knowledge.

Part of the purpose of a psych is to make your opponents think twice or put some doubt in their minds. If you psych on the last board of a match, you do not get the full effect of this (though opponents will tend to remember these things the next time you face them).

If I misunderstood and you routinely, almost always, psych in the first X boards of a match and never in the last Y boards of a match, then that's a different story. But, if you psyche 1 time in 50 early in a match and 1 time in 500 late in a match, I don't think there is anything to worry about.

[blackshoe]

jillybean, on Aug 23 2009, 11:24 AM, said:

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

Your tendency is to psych mostly early in a team match. This will make opps unsure for the rest of the match.
Should this be indicated on your convention card. (e.g: Psches: mostly early in the match):

- when you never discussed this with your regular partner (He has seen it, but maybe does not really realise that this is your strategy).

You can do this once or twice, then it becomes an implicit agreement, illegal.

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

- when you told your partner that this is a good strategy and you will try to do it. 

Illegal, this is a concealed partnership understanding

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

...Or can this be considered as general bridge knowledge and no disclosure is needed?

And this must be a joke? No

It's a partnership understanding. It's only illegal if it violates the convention regulations in force, or if it is not disclosed IAW disclosure regulations. If my partner had been using this strategy enough that I was aware he was doing it, or we had discussed it, I would alert every time he might be doing it. So long as it's not an illegal agreement, it's perfectly legal. Of course, most likely partner will stop doing it, either out of annoyance that I'm "spoiling the surprise" for the opponents or because it gets us more bad boards than good.

In some places and at some levels, knowledge that a particular psych is likely (or at least possible) is "general bridge knowledge". In North American clubs, at least the ones with which I'm familiar, the fact that people can and do psych is not GBK.

Edit: Didn't see Tim's post. He's right, at least in places where people do psych once in a while. Even in places where psychs are very rare, although one should be careful about psyching against the clueless.

[jillybean]

kgr, on Aug 23 2009, 03:14 AM, said:

- when you told your partner that this is a good strategy and you will try to do it.

Makes me think this will occur more frequently than 1 in 50 matches.

blackshoe, on Aug 23 2009, 10:00 AM, said:

It's a partnership understanding. It's only illegal if it violates the convention regulations in force, or if it is not disclosed IAW disclosure regulations. If my partner had been using this strategy enough that I was aware he was doing it, or we had discussed it, I would alert every time he might be doing it. So long as it's not an illegal agreement, it's perfectly legal. Of course, most likely partner will stop doing it, either out of annoyance that I'm "spoiling the surprise" for the opponents  or because it gets us more bad boards than good.

No mention that partner will disclose this agreement– illegal.

I

blackshoe, on Aug 23 2009, 10:00 AM, said:

In some places and at some levels, knowledge that a particular psych is likely (or at least possible) is "general bridge knowledge". In North American clubs, at least the ones with which I'm familiar, the fact that people can and do psych is not GBK.

Are you saying it is general bridge knowledge “to psych mostly early in a team match” ? Isn’t this what we should be discussing here, not some other specific bid /position/vulnerability. ?

[blackshoe]

I am not going to tell a player he has violated the rules until he actually does so. The OP asked whether disclosure was required in certain circumstances, I said it is. If he then discloses his partnership understanding, he has done no wrong.

I made a general comment about psyching, and whether, in general, the probability of a psych in some positions and vulnerabilities is "general bridge knowledge". What I am saying by that is that in some places and at some levels it may be GBK that a particular call might be a psych. That includes the case of psyching early in a teams match (assuming that generally may be done — I'm no expert on when and when not to psych). I would not consider it GBK at my local club, even though a couple of players there are known to psych occasionally (and with those players, there is no question of CPU). It might very well be GBK at world championship level.